Journal of Leadership Education
Volume 10, Issue 2 – Summer 2011
An Exploratory Study of the Role of Task Dependence on
Team Captains’ Leadership Development
Christian J. Grandzol, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Management
235 Sutliff Hall
Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania
Bloomsburg, PA
[email protected]
Abstract
While there is evidence that team captainship in intercollegiate sports can lead to
leadership development, there is little evidence about the role that task
dependence may play on that effect. The individual or team nature of sports may
offer different leadership experiences for team captains, leading to differential
outcomes. In this exploratory study, 31 NCAA Division III team captains reported
their leadership practice using Kouzes and Posner’s Student Leadership Practices
Inventory (2nd ed., 2005) at the beginning and end of one playing season. Results
indicate that team captains developed their use of their leadership practices during
the playing season regardless of whether they led an interdependent or
independent team. The implications for leadership educators interested in the
potentially unique contributions of various leadership experiences are discussed.
Introduction
Examining how to help students develop their leadership potential is a chief
concern of leadership educators. Realizing that developing leaders is the result of
determined doing, not just learning about leadership theories and concepts
(Posner, 2009), educators must consider the impact of an array of sources outside
the classroom where students may learn to be better leaders. For college students
these include various groups such as student organizations, teams, work
experiences, and the subject of this study, team captainship in varsity athletics.
These experiences may offer differing potential for students to learn and practice
leadership skills.
Investigations of intercollegiate athletics and campus recreational sports found
peer leaders in these activities develop leadership skills (Grandzol, Perlis, &
Draina, 2010; Hall, Forrester, & Borsz, 2008; Dupuis, Martin, & Loughead,
57
Journal of Leadership Education
Volume 10, Issue 2 – Summer 2011
2006). These leaders, often referred to as team captains, benefited from the
opportunities provided by leading athletic teams. Yet, due to differences between
organizations and their contexts (Logue, Hutchens, & Hector, 2005), there is need
for research on specific involvement areas (Gellin, 2003). This exploratory study
examines the leadership development of students who take on leadership positions
in intercollegiate varsity sports and whether there were differences based on the
type of teams the students led.
Captainship as a Developmental Experience
Dupuis, Martin, and Loughead (2006) reported that team captains engage in
various behaviors designed to improve team climate, norms, and functioning. In
their qualitative study of collegiate ice hockey captains, they found captains
mentored younger team members, structured team activities, served as a
communication bridge between coaches and their players, modeled standards, and
engaged in other critical leadership behaviors. Further, Loughead and Hardy
(2005) found that peer leaders exhibited leadership behaviors that were distinct
from their coaches. For example, peer leaders exhibited more democratic
behaviors, positive feedback, and social support than their coaches did. As
indicated in these studies, team captainship offers opportunities where studentathletes can practice leadership skills.
Two studies assessed whether students holding leadership roles in collegiate
sports developed leadership skills. Administering Kouzes and Posner’s Student
nd
Leadership Practices Inventory (Student LPI, 2005, 2 ed.), Grandzol and
colleagues (2010) compared the leadership gains of team captains to team
members in National Collegiate Athletics Association (NCAA) Division III
varsity sports during the course of one playing season. They found that team
captains utilized the five leadership practices of (a) model the way, (b) inspire a
shared vision, (c) challenge the process, (d) enable others to act, and (e)
encourage the heart more frequently than team members. The team captains also
increased their usage of all five practices. Team members only developed skills
on one leadership practice – inspire a shared vision.
Hall, Forrester, and Borsz (2008) qualitatively studied students serving in
volunteer leadership capacities in campus recreational sports. These students
developed in areas such as organizing and delegating, giving effective feedback,
motivating others, role modeling behaviors, decision making, and reflective
thinking. Combined, the findings of these previous studies indicate that positional
leadership opportunities in sports can enhance students’ leadership skills.
58
Journal of Leadership Education
Volume 10, Issue 2 – Summer 2011
Influence of Task Dependence
None of the previous studies reported if task dependence was a factor in their
findings, but it is a clear contextual difference. Chelladurai (1979) described task
dependence as the degree of interaction a student-athlete has with others during
execution of the task. Independent sports do not require teammates to interact for
successful task completion; student-athletes compete directly against other
student-athletes, and the outcomes of those matches contribute to a team score
(Beam, Serwatka, & Wilson, 2004). Tennis and cross country are examples of
independent sports. In interdependent sports, teammates interact for successful
task completion. Football and basketball are examples of interdependent sports.
Task dependence is an important distinction with potential implications on
communication, practice environment, coaching relationships, and teamwork. It is
reasonable to expect it may impact the experience of a team captain. Considering
the wealth of research on leadership differences based on situation (e.g., House,
1996; Blanchard, Zigarmi, & Zigarmi, 1985), task dependence in sports may
influence leadership development.
The researchers cited below addressed the issue of task dependence, but did not
examine its impact on leadership development. Using a sample of NCAA
Divisions I and II student-athletes, Beam, Serwatka, and Wilson (2004) found that
independent sports student-athletes preferred coaches who utilized democratic
behaviors, situational consideration, and social support to a greater extent than
their interdependent sports counterparts did. These findings were similar to
Terry’s (1984) and Terry and Howe’s (1984) findings at the elite, club, and
university levels.
It appears team sports athletes believe a rigid training environment is necessary
for team success while independent athletes seem to prefer greater control over
their training environment (Terry, 1984). These preferences have implications on
the extent that athletes cede decision making to their coach or peer leader and the
acceptance of task-oriented behaviors and positive feedback by those leaders
(Beam et al., 2004). They point out that interdependent sports athletes are
generally more comfortable yielding decision making to their leaders and prefer
task-oriented leadership behaviors than their independent counterparts. The
findings are conflicted over which athletes perceive the need for more positive
feedback (Terry & Howe, 1984; Beam et al., 2004).
The previous studies examined the preferences of team members for leadership
behaviors exhibited by their coaches, but did not address the potential differences
among team captains. The studies were also dated or examined non-United States
59
Journal of Leadership Education
Volume 10, Issue 2 – Summer 2011
based programs. The findings do explain leadership differences in team captains
that may arise from task dependence. Due to interdependent sports athletes ceding
more decision making and responsibilities and the requirement for successful
interaction in these sports, it was believed interdependent sports captains would
have more opportunities to interact, direct, organize, role-model, motivate, and
improve their organization than independent sports captains. These might
influence the extent of leadership skills the students would gain from their
experience.
This study’s purpose was to explore differences on use and development of
leadership practices between interdependent and independent sports team captains
in NCAA Division III athletics. It was hypothesized that interdependent sports
team captains would report higher use of the leadership practices than
independent sports team captains. It was also hypothesized that interdependent
sports team captains would develop leadership skills at a greater rate than their
independent sports peers.
Methods
Participants
Sixty-four team captains were invited to participate from six NCAA Division III
universities in one Commonwealth of Pennsylvania athletic conference. These
captains represented the interdependent varsity sports of soccer and field hockey,
and the independent varsity sports of cross country and tennis. Thirty-one captains
completed both the pretest and posttest for a completion rate of 48.5%. Of these,
16 were captains of independent teams (12 cross country; 4 tennis), and 15 were
captains of interdependent teams (12 soccer; 3 field hockey). The response rate
was affected by the number of teams (e.g., men’s and women’s soccer compared
to women’s field hockey) and the number of captains on each team. The sample
was small, but allowed for correct identification of medium to large effect sizes.
The participating institutions unanimously reported they did not offer formal
leadership training for their team captains. Demographic characteristics are
provided in Table 1.
60
Journal of Leadership Education
Volume 10, Issue 2 – Summer 2011
Table 1
Demographic Characteristics
Team Captains
Count
Percent
Gender
Male
Female
Age
18-24
Year in College
Sophomore
Junior
Senior
Ethnicity
Caucasian American
Hispanic American
12
19
38.7%
61.3%
31
100%
2
7
22
6.5%
22.6%
71.0%
29
2
93.5%
6.5%
Instrument
Permission was granted to use the self-version of Kouzes and Posner’s Student
LPI (2005, 2nd ed.) to measure team captains’ frequency of leadership practices.
The Student LPI was designed specifically for college students and measures
broad leadership practices that are transferable to any context, not just sports. The
model asserts that leadership consists of an observable set of skills that can be
developed given motivation, desire, the opportunity to practice, and coaching
(Kouzes & Posner, 2007).
The Student LPI consists of 30 behavior-based items, with six items loading on
each practice: (a) model the way, (b) inspire a shared vision, (c) challenge the
process, (d) enable others to act, and (e) encourage the heart. Respondents
indicate their frequency of a specific behavior on a 5-point scale ranging from
“rarely” to “frequently.” The inventory’s directions are self-explanatory.
Internal reliability scores for the five practices are generally between .70 and .85
(Posner, 2004). Multivariate analyses indicate items within each practice are more
highly correlated with one another than they are with other leadership practices
(Kouzes & Posner, 2006a). Scores show significant test-retest reliability at levels
greater than .91 over varying periods (Kouzes & Posner, 2006b). Factor analyses
revealed the instrument contains five factors (Kouzes & Posner, 2006b). Scores
on the Student LPI were positively correlated with variables such as team
cohesion, member commitment, member loyalty, satisfaction, and credibility
61
Journal of Leadership Education
Volume 10, Issue 2 – Summer 2011
(Kouzes & Posner, 2006b). The leadership practices were not significantly related
to GPA, gender, ethnicity, age, academic background, full or part time status, or
year in school across a variety of collegiate student populations (Posner, 2004).
Design and Procedures
Team captains voluntarily participated by completing the Student LPI. Team
coaches collected the data by distributing the instruments, confidentiality
statements, and demographic questionnaires. Coaches may have influenced the
captain responses to the survey, but the effect would have been minimal. Coaches
only handed out the surveys. Participating captains completed the surveys on their
own time and returned their instruments to a repository outside of their coach’s
purview.
Data were collected over an 11-week period. Team captains completed a pretest
during their preseason week and a posttest during the last week of their season.
Random assignment of participants to groups was not possible because team
captains were already members of their specific teams. No attempt was made to
re-administer the pretest or posttest to captains who failed to complete either
instrument. Missing data were treated as missing completely at random.
Scores were derived for the leadership practices by summing the scores for the six
items within the particular dimension, yielding a score from 6 to 30. Higher
scores represent more frequent use of the specific leadership practice. To
determine whether there were mean differences among groups, repeated measures
were computed with analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the five leadership
practices. Post-hoc analyses for gender was executed because of the larger
numbers of females in the study (see Table 1).
Results
Descriptive statistics were calculated for independent and interdependent team
captains for the five leadership practices measured by the Student LPI. Table 2
presents the group means and standard deviations (on a 30-point scale) for each
leadership practice across the pre- and posttests. Table 3 summarizes the results of
the statistical analyses using the ANOVA.
62
Journal of Leadership Education
Volume 10, Issue 2 – Summer 2011
Table 2
Group Means and Standard Deviations
Leadership Practice
Model the Way
Inspire a Shared
Vision
Challenge the Process
Enable Others to Act
Encourage the Heart
a
n = 16; bn = 15
Pretest
Independenta
Interdependentb
Posttest
Independenta
Interdependentb
M
22.88
22.56
SD
2.42
3.37
M
24.53
24.27
SD
2.39
2.79
M
24.50
24.06
SD
2.85
2.56
M
26.13
26.53
SD
2.50
1.99
21.75
24.06
24.75
3.55
2.65
2.91
24.20
24.73
25.87
2.70
2.69
2.70
23.56
25.19
26.25
2.55
1.76
2.49
25.73
27.13
27.40
1.98
2.13
2.16
63
Journal of Leadership Education
Volume 10, Issue 2 – Summer 2011
Table 3
Summary of Repeated Measures ANOVA for the Leadership Practices
Source
Model the Way
Between-Subjects
Task Dependence
Error
Within-Subjects
Captain Experience
Captain Experience x Task Dependence
Error
Inspire a Shared Vision
Between-Subjects
Task Dependence
Error
Within-Subjects
Captain Experience
Captain Experience x Task Dependence
Error
Challenge the Process
Between-Subjects
Task Dependence
Error
Within-Subjects
Captain Experience
Captain Experience x Task Dependence
Error
Enable Others to Act
Between-Subjects
Task Dependence
Error
Within-Subjects
Captain Experience
Captain Experience x Task Dependence
Error
Encourage the Heart
Between-Subjects
Task Dependence
Error
Within-Subjects
Captain Experience
Captain Experience x Task Dependence
Error
*p < .05 **p < .01 ***p < .001
SS
df
MS
41.94
312.54
1
29
41.94
10.78
3.89
40.26
.00
64.680
1
1
29
40.26
.00
2.23
18.05***
.00
67.47
351.08
1
29
67.47
12.11
5.57*
54.92
2.28
84.47
1
1
29
54.92
2.28
2.91
18.86***
.78
82.65
351.19
1
29
82.65
12.11
6.83*
43.33
.30
93.09
1
1
29
43.33
.30
3.21
13.50**
.09
26.50
262.37
1
29
26.50
9.05
2.93
48.09
6.29
53.68
1
1
29
48.09
6.29
1.85
25.99***
3.40
19.89
312.47
1
29
19.89
10.78
1.85
35.62
.00
74.87
1
1
29
35.62
.00
2.58
13.79**
.00
64
F
Journal of Leadership Education
Volume 10, Issue 2 – Summer 2011
Hypothesis 1
Hypothesis 1 posed that interdependent sports team captains would report higher
use of the leadership practices. The ANOVA demonstrated interdependent team
captains reported significantly higher use of two of the five leadership practices:
inspire a shared vision F(1, 29) = 5.57, p < .05 and challenge the process F(1, 29)
= 6.83, p < .05.
Hypothesis 2
Hypothesis 2 posed that interdependent sports team captains would develop
leadership skills at a greater rate than independent sport team captains. The
ANOVA demonstrated captains in both contexts reported higher usage of all five
leadership practices at the end of their season than at the beginning: model the
way F(1, 29) = 18.05, p < .001, inspire a shared vision F(1, 29) = 18.86, p < .001,
challenge the process F(1, 29) = 13.50, p < .01, enable others to act F(1, 29) =
25.99, p < .001, and encourage the heart F(1, 29) = 13.79, p < .01. No significant
interactions with task dependence were found; team captains in both contexts
developed leadership skills at a similar rate.
Gender
Independent t-tests revealed no significant differences between male and female
team captains on any leadership practice.
Discussion
Interdependent team captains reported significantly higher use of the practices of
inspires a shared vision and challenge the process. These results are consistent
with past investigations that found interdependent teams pose a different context
than independent teams, and interdependent team members cede more decision
making and responsibilities to their leaders (Terry, 1984; Terry & Howe, 1984;
Beam et al., 2004). Inspire a shared vision requires leaders to create a vision for
their organization and enlist the help of others. This practice may be more
applicable to a team sport environment where team success is dependent upon
effective interaction among members. Challenge the process encourages leaders
to take risks and challenge the status quo. Again, due to the necessity of
interaction, perhaps interdependent team leaders seek innovative ways to improve
the team more often to enable the team’s success.
Independent teams feature individuals involved in their own training,
development, and competition. It seems leaders of these teams do not challenge
65
Journal of Leadership Education
Volume 10, Issue 2 – Summer 2011
their teammates as much and goal setting is more personally oriented. The nature
of independent sports is the likely reason for the difference.
No differences were found among team captains on model the way, enable others
to act, or encourage the heart. Regardless of task dependence, captains reported
similar frequency of actions such as role-modeling desired behaviors, building
trust, empowering followers, and celebrating contributions (Kouzes & Posner,
2007). It seems these leadership behaviors are employed equally on both types of
teams. These findings are partially in contrast to previous studies such as Beam et
al. (2004) which found higher preferences for behaviors such as positive feedback
by independent sport student-athletes. However, their study utilized a different
instrument and measured preferences for coaching behaviors. This study
measured team captain leadership behaviors; it did not gauge whether team
members equally desired the behaviors.
The key findings of this study are that both independent and interdependent team
captains developed usage of all five leadership practices during the playing
season. These support past investigations that found peer leaders in sports develop
leadership skills (Grandzol, Perlis, & Draina, 2010; Hall, Forrester, & Borsz,
2008; Dupuis, Martin, & Loughead, 2006). This study reaffirms the potential for
the captain position to enhance student-athletes’ leadership skills.
Contrary to expectations, the team captain experience, whether on an
interdependent or an independent team, fostered equivalent and positive
leadership practice development. This indicates that the experience, regardless of
task dependence, provides a fertile learning opportunity for students. These
findings have no direct comparison, but are different than expectations because of
the research reported by Terry (1984), Terry and Howe (1984), and Beam et al.
(2004). Their studies indicated different preferences for leadership behaviors by
team members and different leadership challenges between the two contexts. In
this study it was speculated that interdependent team captains would have a
greater leadership challenge, and while that may be the case, there was no impact
on leadership skill development of the team captains.
As expected, no statistical differences between male and female team captains
was found. The results are consistent with others (e.g., Posner, 2004) that found
that demographic variables such as gender were not a source of difference. This
finding increases the chances that task dependence and captain experience were
the sources of observed differences in this study.
This study has implications for leadership educators. It demonstrated that students
can learn to become better leaders through “doing” leadership (Posner, 2009).
66
Journal of Leadership Education
Volume 10, Issue 2 – Summer 2011
Students involved in sports peer leadership increased the use of the various
leadership practices and did so regardless of the type of team, despite the fact that
these students were not enrolled in a formal leadership course and did not partake
in a formal reflection process. Perhaps augmenting the leadership experience of
being a team captain, with a formal course or reflection process would lead to
even greater gains in leadership skills. It is also valuable for leadership educators
to consider if the practical leadership experiences students engage in vary by
context, require different emphases, or are actually beneficial to students.
This study also has implications for other constituencies. Coaches may consider
why independent team captains reported lower use of inspire a shared vision and
challenge the process. To the extent these practices are desired and necessary on
an independent sports team the coaches may want to mentor their team captains
and help them navigate these challenges in a largely individual team structure.
The results may also interest the NCAA given its mission of “integrating
intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of
the student-athlete is paramount” (2004, ¶ 2). The NCAA can use the results to
document opportunities for student leadership development in athletics. Student
affairs professionals interested in preparing students with leadership skills should
realize that different student experiences may offer unique contributions.
The results of this study must be viewed in light of its limitations. The study was
exploratory; based on a small sample, and only one conference at the Division III
level. Future researchers should consider larger sample sizes and include other
competition levels to see if the results can be generalized. This study offered an
examination of the development of student leaders during one playing season and
is based on only two measurements. Two measurements taken only a few months
apart complicate the study of how leadership processes unfold because many
leadership phenomena are likely to follow nonlinear growth trajectories (Ployhart,
Holtz, & Bliese, 2002). Finally, as in any study where time is a factor, some other
life circumstance may have confounded the effect on the leadership practices.
Sports leadership and the potential benefits of “doing” leadership are important
considerations for leadership educators, but little research has addressed the
leadership of team captains. Studies that did so neglected the issue of task
dependence. Findings from this study indicate that student-athletes serving as
team captains develop leadership skills regardless of whether they lead an
independent or interdependent team. Interdependent sports team captains reported
higher use of two leadership practices (see above), which may indicate a greater
leadership challenge in team sports. Further investigations are needed for fuller
understanding of team captain leadership and the unique contributions that
practical leadership experiences offer students.
67
Journal of Leadership Education
Volume 10, Issue 2 – Summer 2011
References
Beam, J. W., Serwatka, T. S., & Wilson, W. J. (2004). Preferred leadership of
NCAA Division I and II intercollegiate student-athletes. Journal of Sport
Behavior, 27(1), 3-17.
Blanchard, K., Zigarmi, P., & Zigarmi, D. (1985). Leadership and the one-minute
manager: Increasing effectiveness through situational leadership. New
York: William Morrow.
Chelladurai, P. (1979). A contingency model of leadership in athletics.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 40, 1418B.
Dupuis, M., Bloom, G. A., & Loughead, T. M. (2006). Team captains’
perceptions of athlete leadership. Journal of Sport Behavior, 29(1), 60-78.
Gellin, A. (2003). The effect of undergraduate student involvement on critical
thinking: A meta-analysis of the literature 1991-2000. Journal of College
Student Development, 44(6), 746-762.
Grandzol, C., Perlis, S., & Draina, L. (2010). Leadership development of team
captains. Journal of College Student Development, 51(4), 401-418.
Hall, S. L., Forrester, S., & Borsz, M. (2008). A constructive case study
examining the leadership development of undergraduate students in
campus recreational sports. Journal of College Student Development,
49(2), 125-140.
House, R. J. (1996). Path-goal theory of leadership: Lessons, legacy, and a
reformulated theory. Leadership Quarterly, 7, 323-352.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2005). Student leadership practices inventory:
nd
Self Instrument (2 ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2006a). Student leadership practices inventory,
nd
student workbook (2 ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2006b). Student leadership practices inventory,
nd
facilitator workbook (2 ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
th
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2007). The leadership challenge (4 ed.). San
68
Journal of Leadership Education
Volume 10, Issue 2 – Summer 2011
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Logue, C. T., Hutchens, T. A., & Hector, M. A. (2005). Student leadership: A
phenomenological exploration of postsecondary experiences. Journal of
College Student Development, 46(4), 393-408.
Loughead, T. M., & Hardy, J. (2005). An examination of coach and peer leader
behaviors in sport. Psychology of Sport & Exercise, 6(3), 303-312.
National Collegiate Athletics Association (2004). Our mission. Retrieved June 30,
2008, from http://www.ncaa.org.
Ployhart, R. E., Holtz, B. C., & Bliese, P. D. (2002). Longitudinal data analysis:
Applications of random coefficients modeling to leadership research.
Leadership Quarterly, 13, 455-486.
Posner, B. Z. (2009). From inside out: Beyond teaching about leadership. Journal
of Leadership Education, 8, 1-9.
Posner, B. Z. (2004). A leadership development instrument for students: Updated.
Journal of College Student Development, 45(4), 443-456.
Terry, P. C. (1984). The coaching preferences of elite athletes competing at
Universiade. ’ Canadian Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, 9, 201-208.
Terry, P. C., & Howe, B. L. (1984). Coaching preferences of athletes. Canadian
Journal of Applied Sport Sciences, 9, 188-193.
69
Journal of Leadership Education
Volume 10, Issue 2 – Summer 2011
Author Biography
Christian Grandzol, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor of Management at
Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania. His primary teaching foci are supply
chain, operations, decision making, and research methods. Grandzol earned a
doctorate in Higher Education Administration and the APICS Certification in
Production and Inventory Management. His research interests include lean
manufacturing, pedagogy, student involvement, and leadership.
70